The court noted that the section penalises only those acts of insults or attempts which have been perpetrated with the "deliberate and malicious intention" of outraging the religious feelings of a particular class.
New Delhi: The Tripura high court (HC) has held that insults to religion made without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of a class would not amount to an offence under Section 295A of IPC, LiveLaw reported.
The single bench of Chief Justice Akil Kureshi noted: “Section 295A does not penalise any and every act of insult or an attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs but it penalises only those acts of insults or attempts which have been perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of a particular class.”
“Insults to religion made unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of a class would not come within the said section.”
The high court made these observations while quashing an FIR registered against the petitioner last year for allegedly hurting the religious sentiments of the Hindu community by posting on Facebook about the Bhagavad Gita.
The complainant accused the petitioner of making “untasteful and obscene comments” on Hindu religion by saying that the Gita, the sacred religious text, is a “thakbaji Gita”.
The petitioner, however, said the Facebook post (in Bengali) was being misinterpreted while saying that his intention was not to hurt religious sentiments. It actually meant that the Gita is a pan which fries swindlers.
Section 295A states that whoever, “with deliberate and malicious intention” of outraging the religious feelings of any class of citizens of India, by words, either spoken or written, or by songs or by visible representations or otherwise, insults or attempts to insult the religion or religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
The bench also referred to the findings of a constitution bench of the Supreme Court in Ramji Lal Modi v. State of UP, AIR 1957 SC 620, wherein the SC judge held:
“Section 295A only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. The calculated tendency of this aggravated form of insult is clearly to disrupt the public order and the section, which penalises such activities, is well within the protection of clause (2) of Article 19 as being a law imposing reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a).Having regard to the ingredients of the offence created by the impugned section, there cannot, in our opinion, be any possibility of this law being applied for purposes not sanctioned by the constitution. In other words, the language employed in the section is not wide enough to cover restrictions both within and without the limits of constitutionally permissible legislative action affecting the fundamental right guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a).”
Cases under section 295A
Stand-up comic Munawar Faruqui along with four other persons – Nalin Yadav, Prakhar Vyas, Edwin Anthony and Priyam Vyas – were booked under IPC section 295A for allegedly passing “indecent remarks” about Hindu deities and Union home minister Amit Shah during a New Year show at a cafe in Indore. According to the police, the arrest was made on the basis of “oral evidence” by a BJP MLA’s son who “overheard” Faruqui rehearsing jokes that he was “going to” say in his act.
He was arrested on January 1 and granted bail by the Supreme Court on February 5.
An FIR was filed against Aparna Purohit, Amazon Prime Video’s India head, among others over the screening of the web series Tandav, under 295A of IPC for allegedly hurting religious sentiments. The FIR said the series allegedly depicts Hindu gods in a disrespectful manner.
Tandav also has episodes that refer to the farmers’ protest and violence on the Jawaharlal Nehru University campus. The movie is directed by Ali Abbas Zafar, who is also named in the FIR.
Siddique Kappan, a Delhi-based Malayalam-language journalist and secretary of the Kerala Union of working Journalists’ Delhi unit, was arrested along with three others in Mathura, Uttar Pradesh while on his way to cover the Hathras gang-rape and murder case. He was also charged under section 295(A) of IPC among others, including the draconian Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
Kappan was arrested on October 5 last year.
SOURCE ; THE WIRE
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure
0 Comments